





THE 


V oc OF EXPERIENCE, 


Ady we - ‘ 
THOUGHTS ON THE BEST » wxttdh 


OF 


CONDUCTING MISSIONS 


IN THE 


PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH, 
oe 


IN ITS PRESENT STATE. 


* BEING THE RESULT OF CONFERENCES AMONG 


SEVERAL CLERGYMEN. * 


FOR SALE BY 


DANIELS & SMITH:PHILA. 


STANFORD & SWORDS+NEW YORK. 
1852, 


New b Second | Hand 
B 

S34 W. Fayetie & St. 
eames. 


¥ ‘oe ' 





PREFATORY NOTES. 


I. Tuis Tract might have been as well entitled a 
PLEA FoR CoNnSCIENCE, for the preparation of it has been 
no thoughtless undertaking, but after years of delibera- 
tion, has been commenced and carried through in the 
solemn exercise of conscience, and to vindicate the rights 
of conscience. It is also intended to be a Plea for the 
Unity of the Church. ‘Those who put it forth are ar- 
dently attached to the Church, as well on the ground of 
its Scriptural constitution, as of expediency. 

They most earnestly deprecate its division. For, al- 
though they belong themselves to that portion of the 
Church which has most to complain of in the matters 
hereinafter to be exhibited, yet when they look to the 
whole Christian interest, they do not believe its prospe- 
rity would be promoted by division, but the reverse; and 
they are prepared to argue and to act accordingly. 

The reasons why they think that the views here set 
forth on the subject of Missions, will tend to the preser- 
vation of the Unity of the Church, will appear in their 
place. 


II. In the following discussion no pains will be taken 
to avoid the terms high and low Church, or their equiva- 
lents. They will be used in their conventional sense, and 
not invidiously. All science requires the use of descrip- 
tive terms, and it is hardly necessary to apologize for the 


1V PREFATORY NOTES. 


use of those on Church questions, which have been cur- 
rent for nearly two centuries; nor will we mock the rea- 
der’s intelligence, by seeking to express what they imply, 
by a tedious circumlocution. ‘Those who resort to such 
circumlocution, contrive nevertheless to make their ideas 
palpable, and generally more distasteful to those against 
whom they are directed, on either side. 

And so of the terms Evangelical and Tractarian; they 
will be used as the commonly received and most accu- 
rate exponents of the ideas which necessarily enter into 
this discussion. No doctrines will be charged under 
these names which the parties do not acknowledge. 

With regard to parties in the Church, (or Schools, if 
the term be preferred,) there are not only none now who 
deny their existence, but there are none who have taken 
the pains to form an intelligent judgment upon the subject, 
who deny that the difference between them is a very se- 
rious difference. In this state of things, all wise and good 
men must desire te see the causes of irritation and con- 
flict reduced to the smallest number possible. 


III. It is intended to give this Tract an extensive cir- 
culation, and it asks the impartial examination of all into 
whose hands it may come, as well laymen as clergymen; 
and especially does it ask of those who may not, from 
their ecclesiastical position be expected so readily to agree 
with its general conclusions, to say whether it be not an 
impartial statement of the case. 


THE VOICH OF EXPERIENCE, 


THERE is a time for all things. Of course there is a 
time for Missions; and if they are neglected by any 
Church, when their time, their set time has evidently 
come, such Church must suffer serious loss in all her in- 
terests. 

If the Episcopal Church has done less than others in 
this work, it is to be charged to hindrances accidental, 
peculiar, and temporary, and not to any special inatten- 
tion in her people to the signs and duties of their time. 

A Missionary spirit was a part of her inheritance, 
through God, from the Church of England. 

In 1796 the Convention of New York organized a 
Board of Domestic Missions, and employed the next year 
a valuable missionary to labor among the scattered Epis- 
copalians and Indians in the western part of that State. 

He was succeeded in 1798 by our now venerable Pre- 
siding Bishop, who has carried the gospel by our church 
to so many places where it had not been before. ‘The 
New York organization, nearly extinct in 1800, was re- 
vived in 1801, and again in 1816; for in 1820 it presents 
a fourth Annual Report, has an income of $900, and one 
missionary among the Oneida Indians. A similar dioce- 
san Society was formed in the Valley of Virginia in 1819, 
and employed several missionaries. 

In the year 1820, as the result of an evangelical influ- 
ence acting centrally in Philadelphia, was organized 


6 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


“The Protestant Episcopal Society in the United States, 
for Foreign and Domestic Missions.” On account of the 
necessity for co-operation, in order to accomplish any- 
thing of consequence at that time, the Society soon had 
in it (at least among those who governed it) a majority 
of high churchmen, who were the more numerous, the 
high churchmanship of that day being comparatively of 
a very moderate complexion. Still, there were dissatisfac- 
tions, and controversies, and resignations, on this ground, 
of which there are special records, and still more special 
recollections, for the year 1827. 

This Society, according to its first Constitution, was 
to consist of the Presiding Bishop as President, twenty- 
four Managers, to be appointed by the General Conven- 
tion, and all persons contributing three dollars annually 
to its funds. In 1822 a Catechist was appointed for Libe- 
ria, and the title of the Society changed to “The Domes- 
tic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Epis- 
copal Church 1 in the United States,” and some slight ad- 
ditions made. In 1823 the Society sent out its Bs Mis- 
sionary, the Rev. M& Horrexz, to St. Louis; in 1828, 
Mr. Rosertson, to Greece; and so on until 1835, when 
it had thirty domestic, and four foreign Missionaries—two 
in Greece, and two in China, with an income of $37,000 
for the preceding fifteen months. 

We have now come to the memorable year 1835. At 
the meeting of this Society for that year, held simul- 
taneously with the session of the General Convention, 
important alterations were proposed, and so earnestly 
pressed, that it led to the dissolution of the Society, by 
the voluntary action of the majority, and the consign- 
ment of its work to the General Convention, to be con- 
stituted and carried on by that body, and continue there- 
after the creature of the Ecclesiastical Government of the 


Ol 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 7 


Church. It was objected to the old Society, that it was 
a voluntary Society; although, by its previous action, it 
had so limited the voluntary principle as to make it more 
a Church Society than the P. . 8.8. Union now is. 
Its constitution, under its last form, could not be altered 
but by a concurrent vote of the Society, and the General 
Convention. Still it had some important features of the 
voluntary principle left. ‘The members became such by 
their voluntary act, and by payment of money, and 
elected their Board of Directors. But its freedom stood 
especially in its having connected itself with the Gene- 
ral Convention, by the exercise of its own will, and in 
retaining the power constitutionally to limit, or hinder 
any further government by the Convention. 

All this was changed, and every feature of the volun- 
tary principle cast out. The Church was declared to be 
the Missionary Society, and every baptized person a mem- 
ber, without enquiry as to his will in the premises. There 
ceased in fact to be any Missionary Society, in the ordi- 
nary sense of the term. The Church undertook the work 
as being hers, in her corporate capacity, necessarily and 
(as then ascertained) exclusively. All this was urged on 
the ground of conformity to the primitive Church. 

These ‘positions were controverted at that time, and 
they are worthy of, and likely to receive a much more 
dispassionate examination at thes time. It cannot, in the 
first place, be shown that the primitive Church conducted 
her Missionary operations exclusively through a direction 
created by the ecclesiastical authority. All this has been 
assumed, not proved; nor is it by any means probable, 
but the contrary. But we will even suppose this to have 
been true, still the mistake of 1835 was in supposing 
that, because the work was so “conducted in Apostolic 
times, it must necessarily be sé conducted in all times, 


i 
a 


8 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


however altered in circumstances. And how extensive 
and often mischievous is this false reasoning! We find 
out, (as we suppose) how certain things were in the A pos- 
tles’ times, in modes of operation ; and without waiting to 
enquire, (evenif we were sure of having ascertained what 
the primitive way really was) whether it was not merely 
prudential, and variable, we hastily conclude that such 
must necessarily be our rule, under circumstances en- 
tirely different. 

Take an illustration, which more than meets the case. 
The whole frame-work of the Levitical economy went 
upon the ground that Jerusalem was the place where 
men ought to worship. There was the one altar, temple, 
and priesthood of the Jewish Church ; and there the males 
were commanded to present themselves three times in 
the year. This law was not only observed, but binding, 
so long as the Jewish people continued in their own land. 
But how was this possible in the time of our Lord? The 
Levitical economy was adapted to an unmixed people, in 
a small territory, with a capital easy of access to all; and 
these cercumstances conditioned its obedience. After the 
dispersion it was no longer possible. 

A great change of circumstances had taken place. And 
it is no answer to say that this change was not in accord- 
ance with the divine will. It was a fact; and it changed 
the rule of obedience in externals. We no where find our 
Lord or his apostles reproving the Jews for the change ; 
on the contrary, by the conformity of their own n example, 
they themselves acted upon it. 

So of the Christian Church. Its outward circumstan- 
ces are so changed in the process of ages and of divisions, 
that to say of any particular external mode of operation, 
that it is primitive, no more determines our obligation in 
the premises than a similar assertion would have deter- 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 9 


mined the obedience of the Jews to the Levitical law in 
the time of our Lord. Nay, their case was much stronger ; 
for they had not only the undoubted practice of the primi- 
tive age, (which we have not,) but the express letter of 
the law. 

The Christian institute is broken up by divisions, some- 
what as the Jewish institute was broken up by the disper- 
sion.* Weare divided not only into many denominations, 
but even in the same denomination, and especially in our 
own, there are parties, or schools, if the name be preferred, 
as much estranged from each other, as each one from 
some other denomination nearest in doctrine, and which 
renders it impracticable for us to do, in our corporate ca- 
pacity, all things which “the Church,” abstractly con- 
sidered, is bound to do. 

The plan of 1835 may be the true plan in theory. But 
it is one of those plans, the availability of which depends 
on the Church’s being in its true normal state, and the 
error of the evangelical party consisted in their overlook- 
ing this fact. This plan must necessarily fail where 
there are serious and extensive differences in the Church. 
For, suppose that in case of such differences, the majo- 


* It may be asked,—What shall the end of these things be? A ques- 
tion which one is not more bound to answer than another. But there is 
a solution full of the sweetest consolation and hope to every Christian 
mind. The outward evils of the Jewish institute were never cured, 
(even for the devoutest longings of the pious,) but grew worse and 
worse ;—or rather they were cured by substitution. A new dispensation 
supervened. The time came when the true worshippers worshipped God 
neither in Jersualem, nor in the mountain of Samaria, but wherever they 
might be, in spirit and in truth. 

So of our present mournful divisions and troubles. When Christ 
cometh he will restore all things ;—not all the former external things of 
christianity, but all that those things were intended for, viz., the univer- 
sal service of God. 


10 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


rity should happen to be in error, (not an inconceivable 
case surely,) the whole Church is made a party to its 
propagation through its missions. It becomes, therefore, 
one of those measures which, whether best in theory or 
not, is hable, in certain states of the Church, to become 
the very worst in practice. 

There were not wanting, indeed, in 1835, those who 
foresaw the evils of the change then made, and who testi- 
fied against them to the last. Among them was the present 
Bishop of Pennsylvania. But the words of those who 
were for it, were fiercer than the words of those who were 
against it, and they carried the day. The new movement 
ignored all parties, and repudiated the idea of elective 
affinity in toto. At least it professed to do so; though 
the parties to it were instinctively conscious that the 
whole success depended on allowing the affinities of theold 
Society to be carried into the new. Hence, the tacit un- 
derstanding—tantamount to a written compact—that the 
control of the Foreign department should be given to the 
Evangelical side, and the Domestic department to the 
high Church; though it was hard to say which was most 
strenuously exacted, the exclusion of the ¢erms, or the 
practical recognition of the principles, which they repre- 
sented. We feel unwilling to say that this movement 
was contrived and carried out by high churchmen, for 
the extension of their own views; no doubt they acted 
sincerely and honestly, as high churchmen, and it is not 
necessary to say more, in this place, respecting its real 
origin. It is certain that the cry of peace and union, 
with an abundance of hope, won for it a decided majority 
of the old Evangelical laborers in the missionary work. 
But what has been the result? The record is instruc- 
tive. ‘Truth and error have worked according to their 
own nature, notwithstanding the brilliant hopes of 1835. 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. ll 


Note the following extract from the Sermon before the 
Board of Missions, at its last triennial meeting, by Bishop 
Hopkins: 

“Fifteen years have passed away since the Church 
beheld the apparent annihilation of party spirit in your 
great Missionary organization. Then, for a while, there 
was an exulting joy in the union of discordant elements. 
Then, for a while, we seemed realizing the meaning of 
the Psalmist, ‘Behold how good and pleasant it is for 
brethren to dwell together in unity.’ But, alas! the 
reign of internal peace was brief and transitory. The 
adversary devised a subtler scheme than ever, and the 
old spirit of discord revived in a new form, more potent, 
and beguiling than before. The result has been that the 
missions of the Church have labored for a considerable 
time under the heavy disadvantages of discord and sus- 
picion. And at the present moment, there are many 
who see no remedy for the existing evil, but in the aban- 
donment of the constitution, and a separate organization, 
according to party lines, in which the zeal of each may 
operate, without check or hindrance, in its own way. 
For myself, brethren, | am bound to say, in candor, that 
I have no share, either in the credit or the responsibility, 
of our present constitution. I confess I had no faith, at 
the time, in the apparent fusion of parties. J doubted 
the policy of attempting a kind of organization which 
was perfectly new in the history of the Church, and be- 
lieved the end could be accomplished far more safely in 
the form of a voluntary Society. which the experience of 
others had fully tested. I voted accordingly in the nega- 
tive, along with asmall minority. Nor have I since seen 
any reason to question the correctness of my position.” 
This is the matured judgment of one who claims to be 
of neither party in the Church, and who, after an impar- 


1 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


tial observation of fifteen years, says, it has turned out 
just as he expected. 

Upon full experiment, the new organization has failed, 
or shown itself less adapted to the work, than that which 
it superseded. He does, indeed, subsequently say, that, 
as it has been adopted, it had better be adhered to, “ on 
account of the controlling necessity which I see for uni- 
ty.” This brings his view of missions as a practical 
question at present into harmony with the design of the 
Sermon, viz., the “fusion of parties, or unity.” 

It has now become an urgent question, whether there 
be such a reasonable probability of this “ fusion of par- 
ties,” that the missions of the Church should be kept 
waiting upon it indefinitely, though under the “ heavy 
disadvantages” referred to ;—whether, or how long, this 
universally acknowledged embarrassment should be suf- 
fered, from a state of things of which (though Bishop 
Hopkins may consider it as temporary) no one can see 
the end. It becomes us solemnly to consider what are 
the true grounds of this embarrassment; the extent to 
which it has increased, and the remedy. 


I. The true grounds of this embarrassment. 

They are plain enough, viz: The essential disagree- 
ment of the parties, which are mechanically united in 
the work of Missions. ‘They differ on the life-question 
of the Gospel. If any difference can be fundamental and 
vital, this is, and must involve the consciences of both 
parties. That this alleged difference is the true ground 
of the embarrassment, even Tractarians do not deny. Is 
it merely a supposed difference, (or such an one as may 
be tolerated,) or is it, as here asserted, fundamental, and, 
to human view, irreconcilable? ‘To answer this question, 
we have but to state the doctrinal views of each party ; 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 13 


and to color or exaggerate either, would be to hinder, 
rather than promote the object of this essay, as will ap- 
pear before we close. 

The views of the Evangelical side cannot be stated, 
with more accuracy, than in the doctrinal (of the thirty 
nine) articles. ‘They need not be recited here. 

The views of the Tractarian side we will take from 
Bishop Hopxins’s ‘‘ Humble Address to the Bishops, 
Clergy and Laity of the Protestant Episcopal Church, 
on tolerating among our Ministry the Doctrines of the 
Church of Rome. 1846’”—a production as remarkable 
for its candor and impartiality, as for the clearness and 
unanswerable force of its argument. 

After quoting the open avowal of the leader of the 
Tractarian party, that the decrees of the Council of Trent 
were to be tolerated as matters of opinion, and alluding 
to the secessions to the Church of Rome, ‘‘as not the 
worst result of the Romish feeling, which, to the aston- 
ishment and grief of the whole Church,* has sprung up 
so lately, and increased so fast among us,” he quotes 
eleven of the the thirty-nine Articles, and shows the radi- 
cal difference between them, and the views held on the 
points contained in them, by Tractarians. We quote 
what he says upon two of them, as sufficient : 

‘Our 19th Article asserts, in plain terms, that the 
Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living and 
manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith. But 
the Tractarian evades this, by saying that he thinks just 
as Rome does, with respect to the matters themselves ; 
and he reconciles himself with the Article, as he sup- 
poses, by telling us that, in his mind, they are not held 
as matters of faith, but only as matters of opinion. 


*The Bishop was mistaken in supposing the whole Church to be grieved 
by this doctrine. 


14 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


“ Our 11th Article asserts the cardinal doctrine of Jus- 
tification by faith only, in plain contrariety to the Coun- 
cil of Trent; which confounds justification with sancti- 
fication, makes baptism the instrumental cause of our 
first*justification ; our good works the instrumental cause 
of its subsequent increase; and our inherent righteous- 
ness the ground of our final acceptance. The T'ractarian 
here agrees with Rome most fully.” 

We might follow the Bishop through his argument, 
which fixes the whole doctrinal system of Rome upon 
the Tractarian party, as matters of opinion, (that is, things 
believed to be true); but it would be proving more than 
enough for our purpose, for the evangelical body will pro- 
test to a man, and with all the energy of which they are 
capable, that the apostacy of the Tractarian party from 
the faith of the Church on the doctrine of the eleventh 
Article, is of a more serious nature than any thing which 
divides the Church from Methodism, or Presbyterianism. 
Dr. Moruter is right in declaring that this doctrine con- 
ditions the whole system of Protestantism. If conscience 
binds the evangelical members of the Church to any 
thing, it binds them to disconnect themselves with the 
propagation of this error, in every form, directly or indi- 
rectly, where they may be properly held responsible. 

But Tractarianism, it may be said, is confined to a few 
persons in the Church, and comes not, therefore, neces- 
sarily into the question of Missions. Would that this 
were true; but it is not true. 

The Tractarian portion of the high Church party is 
the active and governing portion of it. Practically, they 
are the majority of the high Church party. No censure 
of their errors, even in the most moderate shape, can be 
passed in the General Convention. Dr. Szapury was 
the first to endorse, in full, the doctrine of Tract No. 90; 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 15 


a tract which shocked the moral sense of Christendom, 
and indelibly stamped its author as_a wicked man. 
“The principle of this tract,” says Dr. Seapury, in his 
paper of the 14th of March, 1846, ‘we did not hesitate 
to adopt; and we can only look back on the intemperate 
opposition which it has received, with a sense of shame, 
not for the Church, for it is no growth of hers, but for 
humanity.” And Dr. Seapury was the first choice of 
the clergy of the Diocese of New York, for Bishop, and 
but for the laity might have been Bishop now; and it is 
understood that if doctrinal unsoundness had been the 
only objection to him, his plurality of the clerical vote 
would have been larger. But who does not know that 
the clerical majority of the Diocese of New York is in 
full sympathy with the majority in the Board of Mis- 
sions? We do not say that the majority of the Board of 
Missions “adopt the principle” of Tract No. 90; but 
they are in full ecclesiastical sympathy with those who 
think Dr. SEaBury’s views to be no bar to his elevation 
to the highest office in the Church. ‘The leaders in the 
Board of Missions are the leaders in the Tractarian par- 
ty ; and that the principles of the one are carried into the 
administration of the other, and the evangelical portion 
of the Church made to “serve” with these principles, is 
manifest to every one who will look at the facts. ‘Take 
it even in the foreign department. ‘The compact which 
gave the control of that department to the evangelical 
party, and without which the Society could not have 
been formed, was violated at the first opportunity. One of 
the Society’s Foreign Missionaries, lapsing into 'Trac- 
tarianism, he was taken up by the majority of the Board, 
and supported over the heads of the Committee, on party 
grounds, for years after he had not only become periectly 
useless as a Missionary, but was embarrassing the whole 


16 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


Foreign work. Nay, can we now believe it, he was actu- 
ally made a Bishop, without a Diocese, and without a 
single presbyter! Huis Tractarian friends went every 
year into the Board of Missions, and there bound heavy 
burdens, and laid them on the shoulders of conscientious 
men, which they themselves scarce touched with one of 
their fingers. 

The Committee were compelled to support the now 
Bishop SouTHeatTE, after it was manifest that his ex- 
penses could not be raised by his own friends. And 
even after an expenditure estimated at more than $70,000, 
upon this so-called Missionary, and his projects; and 
they had all ended in utter nothingness and vanity, the 
Missionary himself having given up, and returned home, 
the Board of Missions, which met in Cincinnati, in 1850, 
must still instruct the Foreign Committee, not only to 
establish this mission, but to procure the judgment of 
Bishop SouTueatTE, as to the proper mode of carrying it 
on; when the Board knew that the Committee had long. 
lost all confidence in his judgment, irrespective of doc- 
trinal unsoundness. 

With respect to China, who that attended the meetings 
of the Board, in 1844, can doubt that if there had been a 
Tractarian connected with that mission, or who under- 
stood the language, he would have been made the Bishop ? 
With respect to Africa, all those in the field were passed 
over, and the Rev. Mr. GLennige was elected Bishop,who 
had never been in Africa, and was understood not to be 
in ecclesiastical sympathy with any missionary there. 
He did not accept. 

Let us now look into the Domestic department, with 
special reference to which this tract is written. 

We cannot well see how the high Church party, if 
they hold their peculiarities to be important, could have 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCR. L7 


consented, conscientiously, in 1835, to put the propaga- 
tion of their views beyond their control, in the Foreign 
field. Much less can we see how the evangelical party 
could have consented to the same thing, with respect to 
their views, in the domestic field, especially when, by 
giving up this field to the control of the other side, they 
put it into their power to control both, by means of the 
increased majorities which the multiplication of small 
dioceses, by the domestic missionaries, would soon give 
them in the General Convention, a power which, as we 
have seen, was speedily exercised as well in reference to 
Foreign, as Domestic Missions 

But there was this tacit understanding, on both sides, 
in 1835. ‘The evangelical side have submitted to the 
invasions upon their own field, but with complaint and 
protest, which has been their only remedy, short of their 
withdrawal from the Society. With respect to the Do- 
mestic field, they have consented to have no voice in it, 
thus far; and they would, in all probability, continue 
this consent, had not another virtual infringement of the 
compact taken place in this department. In 1835, Trac- 
tarianism had obtained no standing in this country; and 
no one supposes that the evangelical party would then 
have gone into this Missionarv Society, with the under- 
standings then had, if they had, for a moment, contem- 
plated as likely what has since taken place. 

It is not complained of, that high Churchmen have 
been almost exclusively employed as Domestic Missiona- 
ries. Butvery many of them have been of the extreme 
Tractarian and Romanizing stamp. It would be invidi- 
ous and uncalled for to mention them by name, with their 
Romish opinions and practices. A single example may 
be taken, to represent a large class, and this example is 
cited because the missionary in question made himself 


18 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


conspicuous, by the publication of a ‘‘ Manual,” &., in 
Missouri, which should have subjected him to trial and 
expulsion from a Protestant Church; and though it was 
virtually dedicated to the Bishop, no censure was ever 
passed upon it, (so far as the Church knows,) either by 
the Bishop, or the Board of Missions. 

And this Romanizing Missionary is but a sample of 
numbers who hold the same views, and who, by means 
of the small dioceses which they have been employed to 
establish, have acquired a controlling influence in the 
legislation of the Church. In charging all this however, 
so disastrous (in the opinion of the evangelical side,) to 
the Protestant character of the Church, we would not be 
understood as censuring the Domestic Committee. We 
may suppose them opposed to Tractarianism themselves, 
(although we must confess we have no knowledge of their 
being very seriously set against it,) but suppose they are 
—suppose them earnestly Protestant—they have a 
Romanizer proposed to them for appointment as a mis- 
sionary ; one whose appointment, in their private opin- 
ion, would more likely prove a curse than a blessing. 
What are they todo? If they should refuse him, on the 
ground of Tractarianism, they know perfectly well that, 
at the very next meeting of the Board, they would either 
be displaced, or censured, or legislated into obedience. 

Besides, it is a question how far they would have the 
right to refuse him. They must know that a part of the 
funds at their disposal, was contributed by persons who 
agreed in opinion with the proposed missionary, and 
would wish their money to be appropriated for the exten- 
sion of their own views. 

But suppose the committee themselves to be opposed 
to the evangelical interest in the Church; of course then 
every thing under their administration must be expected 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 19 


to work against that interest. In such a state of things, 
while it is manifest that the evangelical portion of the 
Church cannot be satisfied, and ought not to be, it may 
still be pertinently asked, wherein is the Domestic Com- 
mittee to be blamed for managing, in their own way, a 
department which was by mutual understanding to be 
theirs. It is not so much their fault, as the fault of the 
system, which was wholly unfitted for a Church so much 
divided as ours was in 1835, and much more at present. 
The result of this system is,as might have been antici- 
pated, a FAILURE. 


II. The extent of this embarrassment. Has it been 
only partial, such as all such enterprizes are liable to; or 
has it been such as to indicate an inherent defect in the 
system—something organic and incurable? We may be 
content, on this head, to take the acknowledgments, la- 
mentations, and protests, of the Tractarian friends of our 
Domestic Missions, as now constituted. Bishop FREE- 
MAN, in his Sermon before the Board, in 1847, has the 
following, in reference to ‘the cries for paltry sums ap- 
propriated to support self-denying Missionaries. Shame 
to the Church, that there should be any occasion for 
them!” Again—‘ The total destruction of our mission- 
ary enterprize at home, in our own land, is seriously ap- 
prehended.” If this was the case in 1847, what is it in 
1851, when the income of the Domestic Committee, ex- 
clusive of the ‘ miscellaneous’ department, is less by 
some thousands of dollars than it was in 1847? 

We might quote at any length acknowledgments that 
the Society, as now constituted, has not the confidence 
of the Church; but the facts of the case wholly super- 
cede the necessity for acknowledgments or arguments. 
{In the report of 1837,—the first report of a full year, un- 


20 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


der the new system,—there is acknowledged for Domestic 
Missions, $21,000. For the year 1851, there is acknow- 
ledged, exclusive of the ‘ miscellaneous” head, $19,000. 
In the year of the new organization, the Church had 
about forty thousand communicants. In the year 1851, 
it had eighty thousand communicants. And it will not 
be denied, we suppose, that in the last seventeen years, 
the Church has shared in the vast increase of wealth and 
power in the country. But, in 1837, the Church gave 
for Domestic Missions at the rate of fifty cents per annum 
for each communicant. In 1851 she gives less than 
twenty-five cents. 

The Presbyterian Board of Domestic Missions received 
in 1835 the sum of $28,000. In 1850 the sum of $79,000. 
In 1836, the Presbyterian Church gave at the rate of 
thirteen cents per annum for each communicant. In 
1850, at the rate of thirty-eight cents. They started with 
us at about one-fourth the amount. After fifteen years, 
they have risen to three times the original rate. We 
have fallen to one-half—statistics these, recorded with 
the deepest sorrow. | 

And how long is this to be endured? Can it be that 
our high Church brethren, sesh it to be longer endured ? 
Can it be that they would hinder us from laboring in the 
domestic field upon our own principles, when they know 
that we never can, and never will co-operate with them 
in their domestic department, until it is purified from the 
leaven of Tractarianism? Will they so purify that de- 
partment? Some who act with them, we have no doubt, 
would gladly do so. But how can they? So far from it, 
the direction of such movements is not backward, but 
forward. | 

Would they sooner see the field lie waste, or be culti- 
vated by other denominations, than see it occupied by 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 21 


evangelical or low church Episcopalians? It is for them 
to say. We have no hesitation in answering a parallel 
question. We would co-operate in occupying the field by 
high churchism, as it stood in 1835, provided it could be 
kept as it then stood; but we would much sooner see it 
occupied by any of the denominations commonly called 
orthodox and evangelical, than to see it occupied by 'T'rac- 
tarianism, as developed in the Missionary in Missouri, 
already referred to. | 


The last point of enquiry will be, 


Ill. Tue Remepy. Our experience, and the experi- 
ence of others, leaves no room for doubt, as to what this 
remedy is, viz.: areturn to the Voluntary Princtple, in its 
freest exercise. What friend of Missions would wish to 
see two hostile and irreconcilable elements struggling 
longer in controversy, when it is universally seen and 
acknowledged that the result is to quench the missionary 
spirit among us—hinder the progress of the Church, high 
and low, and increase the alienation of its members more 
and more? If the question were now to be decided, and 
with our present experience, every body knows that the 
plan of 1835 could not be adopted. Why, then, should 
we persevere in an experiment which has so signally 
failed ? 

It is too late for any one to suppose, that the evangeli- 
cal portion of the Church will support a plan which con- 
tributes almost exclusively to strengthen Tractarianism, 
which gives that complexion to the new dioceses formed, 
and through them to the General Convention, more and 
more. And we put it to the consciences of high church- 
men to say whether, if this Constitution of the Mission- 
ary Society had been found to work as much against 


A> THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


their views of truth, as the other side have found it to 
work against theirs, they would adhere to it for another 
hour? They know that they would not. dt is without 
a parallel that one-half—(for it will not be denied that, 
at least so far as the effective support of Missions is con- 
cerned, the evangelical portion of the Church constitute 
at least one-half of it)—it is without a parallel, that one- 
half of the Church should allow fatal errors in doctrine 
to be taught by the other half, in the name of both; and 
all this in such a way that the measure of the success of 
these errors on Missionary ground, will be the measure 
of their success in the legislation of the Church. The 
grievances of the evangelical side, in the action of the 
Board in the Foreign department, have been very great. 
In the working of the Domestic department, they are in- 
tolerable. 

And let the Tractarian party say, whether they have 
not had their grievances with this system. Their heart 
knows its own bitterness with respect to the Constanti- 
nople Mission. 

Had not this party been laboring under some sense of 
disappointment and wrong, it could never have used its 
power in the Board to send the Foreign Committee to 
Bishop Sourueate for advice so late as 1850. Nor could 
it have manifested the spirit which it did at the meeting 
of the Board in 1851, though the mission was dead, twice 
dead, and plucked up by the roots. 

The spirit then—and often before—brought to light at 
the meetings of the Board, told to every observer, by a 
method more convincing than all the logic of the schools, 
that no body of men composed of such elements, can be 
God’s instrument for kindling in the Church the flame 
of missionary love. ‘This is not the work of a house di- 
vided against itself—the abode of jealousy and passion, 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 23 


ageression and resistance, where measures are continually 
being introduced, which tend to presumption on the one 
side, and to irritation and despair on the other. How 
utterly is the very genius of the work misjudged! A 
Missionary organization conducted in the spirit of its pro- 
fessed object, is an inestimable blessing to all who have 
to do with it, benefactors and beneficiaries; to the first 
not less than to the last. It would be hard to say, whether 
the Church Missionary Society, though a foreign Mis- 
sionary Society, has done more good to the Church of 
England, or to the heathen of Asia and Africa. Such an 
institution is pre-eminently calculated to gather together 
in one, the best affections of the Church, and to pour them 
forth in refreshing streams among those who are without. 

But how far is this true of our organization? ‘There 
stands the precious vessel, nearly dry, by the confession 
of all, while so many are perishing of thirst. And shall 
we think to remedy the evil by the constant driving of 
canonical and ecclesiastical bands and hoops upon the 
vessel already nigh to being crushed inwards? Shall we 
remain longer insensible to the lessons of experience? 

In order to success in the missionary work, it must be 
controled and informed by a united, harmonious and all- 
sympathizing body ; a body which is the home of confi- 
dence, charity, and prayer. A body animated by such 
affections will, by its action, surely touch the souls of the 
Christian people, and call forth their prayers and their 
_ alms, nay, their children, for the work; and nothing else 
can. Unless such a body can be had, the work is dead. 

And can such a body be constituted, by mechanically 
forcing together the elements now in such antagonism in 
the Church? Harmony and confidence between the dif- 
ferent members of the Board, as now constituted, is not 
to be hoped for, and every body knows it. 

4 


24 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


What, then, is the remedy ?—for the Missionary work 
must be done, or we are faithless to our Lord, and a lost 
Church. We say, without hesitation, that the only remedy 
which the case admits of, is ina return to the voluntary 
principle. et each interest work by itself, under the 
laws of elective affinity. Let the rzght so to work be uni- 
versally and freely conceded, for it is a right which the 
General Convention cannot justly take from the members 
of the Church. All Christian work cannot be done “by 
authority ; and it is by constantly enlarging the boun- 
daries of authority, that authority comes to be a griev- 
ance, and a party majority becomes the real author of 
schism. * 

But it may. be objected that, if the foregoing arguments 
are good for our return to the voluntary principle, in the 
work of Missions, they are good for a division of the 
Church. Not so. Wedo not look upon division as a 
remedy for evils. A division would nof call off the Trac- 
tarian from his error, but only confirm him in it, while 
it would not leave the evangelical more free to propagate 
truth than he is now, (or would be if he could have liberty 
in the missionary field.) The General Convention, thus 
far, have not materially abridged the Christian liberty of 


* Our Missionary Society, if regarded as “ general,” on account of its 
being the creature of the ecclesiastical government of the Church, may 
be illustrated by the case of our “« General Theological Seminary.” That 
Institution cannot be really general in its character, that is, aiming to 
suit the main divisions of opinion in our Church, without being so neu- 
tral, so excedingly moderate, and tame as to become inefficient, and un- 
patronized, suiting none. If it have any efficiency now, it is because it 
is not general, except in organization and name, but has become the 
Seminary of a party. With that party it has favor,—and for the pur- 
poses of that party,—life and energy. This is so well understood on 
all sides, as practically to abate the oes of its being called a “ Gene- 
ral” Seminary. 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 25 


the members of the Church. Congregations may elect 
the ministers of their choice; and so they have no hin- 
drance in their own parishes; may be as high Church, or 
evangelical, as they please, and no one is likely to med- 
dle with them, or can, unless there be some gross excess 
beyond former example. Individual Bishops may, if dis- 
posed, carry on a petty annoyance, but, generally, the 
minister in his parish is unrestrained by any external 
pressure. So long as this is the case, each party must 
deplore a separation, which, aside from all the evils which 
it would carry into so many communities, would put a 
most effectual bar to the influence of what each party 
might consider to be the truth, upon the other. 

Division will not become a necessary evil, until such 
time as a majority in the General Convention may impose 
regulations or canons which would wound the consciences 
of the minority, and bind them to that which they believe 
to be sinful. If such a time should ever come, the fact 
of the majority being found at the time to have the mis- 
sionary work of the whole Church under their control, 
would not hinder a final separation of the parties, but the 
contrary. 

We cannot concur in the opinion that the continuance 
of the present missionary system will promote the unity of 
the Church. On the contrary, in addition to its lamen- 
table failure in its intended work, it has proved one of the 
most fruitful sources of irritation and distrust. Let it be 
given up freely, by both sides. Nothing like it ever suc- 
ceeded. ‘The Roman Catholic Church itself has nothing 
that answers to it. It is a most: ill-advised measure to 
oppose longer the fixed desire of so large a body of the 
Church. Let each party be free to do good, in accord- 
ance with their own conscientious views of truth and duty, 
without hindrance from the other. 


26 THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. 


In the event of this return to the voluntary principle, 
our present domestic work would properly remain in its 
present hands, with liberty to the evangelical side to un- 
dertake any similar work, if they should see fit. Surely, 
the field is extensive enough. 

The Foreign work would of course remain in its pre- 
sent hands, and be carried on by the evangelical interest, 
with liberty to the other side, who have felt grieved at 
the discontinuance of the mission to Constantinople, to 
renew it under the exclusive guidance, and at the exclu- 
sive cost of its own friends. So at least the theater of 
vexing between Ephraim and Judah, would be so far re- 
duced; and then, unless our Christian people be really 
different from others, our missionary work would revive, 
and be carried on with power. 

Can it be that evangelical E/piscopalians, now doing 
comparatively nothing for Domestic Missions, would not 
rise to their responsibilities, if the way could be opened 
before them! All eyes are turned to “‘the West’; ‘the 
great West”; “the mighty West”; that world beyond 
the mountains—an expanse for the development of human 
life unparalleled beneath the sun. Can we look into that 
“Valley of decision,” where so many Christian agencies 
are being set on foot by all who are partakers of the Chris- 
tian life, and not bear our part in emancipating so many 
millions from sin and death? ‘Too long have we been 
held back from the work. 


THE VOICE OF EXPERIENCE. ¥ 


NOTE. 


In the winter of 1850-51, it was contemplated by a 
number of persons, clerical and lay, to propose publicly 
the organization of a Domestic Missionary Society. 

While this was in contemplation, the movement in the 
same direction in Pennsylvania was announced, and it 
seemed proper to wait that experiment. ‘This movement, 
considering the quarter from which it comes, seems to 
rebuke the want of zeal in those who strongly profess 
their attachment to the evangelical interest in the Church. 

It wishes, apparently, to save the cause, and at the 
same time, to save appearances. Nominally, an imperium 
in imperio, it is in fact an independent Society; and 
would have been loudly denounced as schismatical, (it 1s 
now in some quarters, ) if it had been formed before it had 
been so clearly discovered by those who controlled the 
old Society, that they could not command the confidence 
or support of the Church. 

It is, perhaps, too soon to look for definite results from 
this enterprize, which seems wholly in the right direc- 
tion. Notwithstanding its government being confined by 
its constitution to persons within the Diocese of Penn- 
sylvania, we should for the present feel all confidence in 
entrusting funds to the disposal of those who have it in 


charge, leaving it to time and experience to decide whe- 


ther this will permanently meet the necessities of the 
case, or whether a general institution will become neces- 
sary. Itis for the work to be done that we are concerned, 
rather than for the persons who are to do it. 










~ 
a 

*» 

ange 
poet 
po 

at ene eee 

te, 


2) ) ees 


i 


t 
me, # he : 
ve 
~s 


cA . 





j 
’ 
et 

bats 


4 5 } ie. 

¢ Rs ae , r 
Pie ee | + ™ SF) ; Eis 3 ’ 
ot ae aod sye: madd? > Pole ack 


> Pie ab gage aemradartic * hoo eae 
6h <i Sa! et ae ; ated Tae 





























$e BOE vn. ¥ ; iy ah : “S ’ 
en: og me Goto thei t er 4 
* ‘ Z “: 2 . fad C 
ae ee tek oe =e am prong O'sy Pie . €} nit 
Feat oe Lome aie ret Soh see x ee Opes a Lt BO yor ‘iat! 
a : anh iF res yes : i bs e Poy ar b 2 ¥ res D tg? eg we 
ey. cf sagt * eve orfak teed 
‘ Po & 


pet on ici Ri 

















Ya) Ww 2 x . i — M2 tae 
| he, a CMPD toes ce 2a eo fe erp poten 
‘ od . A , ; DAVE SPR . RACER; . as vate 182 qqae 
‘ 7 4 Fath ‘ Y ae 
# hf : F ea ae - Dee. , ake : 
eae 2 rh. ae ac jay 
eae, as aware cs oo ti at es 
; Yd ‘ a se ON 
43i eae” : 
‘ienlle a oe 
a Ae r> 
ic <2 A +3 We: 
” ‘ 4 ae * 
4 5 a ‘4 ee : 
ro fg 
in | ae ey ie 
~ : am gia 
"4 ¥ } se 
: 4 q f +f 
“ cS CM a6 
: : ety aM a 
* € j sat 7 J ‘ + 
fe a ah at ” raga: 
Pt eeltineadaid SA! oie cine mE ens at 1 live 
vs as = 
x». 


7 
: 
+ 
ile 
“s 
~~. 
“ 
“ 
: 
ad 


, 
~~ 
y 
> 
; 
eg 
ye 
oy 
Ske 
wa 
tone 
Sate aths 
pO le 
sa pi 


a i Bou v9 3 4g 


— 





° 
‘ 
> 
a 
rs 
_ 
=o 


¥ 
ad 

Ne oe 
- 
* 


Pi OE a a 
ye seh 
* A 

2 4 a 
* 


% 


ay 


~ -£ 


+ 

ae 

i 
+ = 


panty set 
. 3 


